| Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
00-3070
|
Shaw v. McKune
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-3346
|
U.S. v. Underwood
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-6009
|
U.S. v. Orange
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-3221
|
Hickles v. McKune
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-1125
|
Colorado Farm Bureau Federation v. United States Forest Service
Order |
Environmental Law |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-3311
|
Curry v. U.S. Disciplinary Barracks
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-7103
|
Easterwood v. Champion
Statute of limitations for habeas corpus petition based on new evidence does not begin until date new evidence could have been discovered. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-1143
|
Goebel v. Denver & Rio Grand Western Railroad Co.
District court, when faced with objection to expert testimony, must demonstrate by specific findings on record that it performed its duty as gatekeeper. |
Torts |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-7019
|
U.S. v. Cherry
Co-conspirators waive confrontation and hearsay objections as a result of reasonably foreseeable actions in furtherance of an ongoing conspiracy. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-1089
|
U.S. v. Akers
Court does not abuse discretion by denying right to self-representation when motive is to delay trial. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
98-6395
|
Barr v. Runyon
Order |
Employment Law |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-1010 and 99-1130
|
Manning v. McGraw-Hill Inc.
Order |
Employment Law |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-6275
|
Nelson v. ITT Hartford Fire Insurance Co.
Order |
Insurance |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
00-7013
|
Wilkins v. Fries
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
00-3118
|
Lambros v. Booker
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-3274
|
U.S. v. McClatchey
Post-conviction motion for acquittal cannot be granted when reasonable basis exists for jury verdict. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
98-1430
|
Romero v. Furlong
Breakdown in communication between attorney and client resulting from client's unjustifiable reaction to his situation does not receive Sixth Amendment protection. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-6217
|
Canadian County Water Authority v. City of Union
Order |
Administrative Agencies |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
00-1129
|
Merritt v. Pugh
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-4163
|
U.S. v. Juarez-Rodriguez
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-6127
|
Barker v. City of Del City
Courts must use balancing test to determine First Amendment violations when speech at issue does not implicate employee's politics or substantive policy viewpoints. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
98SC812
|
Slack v. Farmers Insurance Exchange
Pro rata liability among tortfeasors statute applies to both intentional and negligent tortfeasors. |
Torts |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-1565
|
U.S. v. Arrington
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
00-5008
|
Jones v. Hargett
Order |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-4122
|
U.S. v. 129.97 Acres of Land
Order |
Real Property |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99SC8
|
People v. Lefebre
Trial court's removal of jurors prosecution challenged for cause without allowing defendant opportunity to question is inherently prejudicial. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
99-0176
|
Friedemann v. Kirk
Opinion |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | ||
|
96-36051
|
Farr v. US West Communications Inc.
Employer offering early retirement breaches ERISA duties by providing misleading information on tax consequences. |
Labor Law |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
97-30348
|
U.S. v. Beltran
Admission of prior consistent statements harmless error where already made by defendant's counsel. |
Criminal Law and Procedure |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 | |
|
98-35004
|
Regennitter v. ALH Commissioner of the Social Security Administration
Denial of disability benefits isn't supported where claimant's and corroborating witnesses' testimony improperly rejected. |
Administrative Agencies |
|
Jun. 21, 2000 |